neo-feminist view

[woodnymph_O]

hmmm
found this this morning , and I have to say, I think she'll feel she missed out later. with no experience how do you know if the husbands any good? maybe she'll read alot..
Herw's the article for those like me who hate to have to click

By Elizabeth Sandoval
41 minutes ago
No, I am not an ultraconservative who is cohabitating with a houseful of cats and TiVo'ing Lifetime movies. I'm a middle-of-the-road 32-year-old who likes tattoos and loud music. And yes, I am cute (I've been told by friends and strangers alike). So you can put aside the notion that I'm bitter about not being offered the chance to have sex.


What I am is a neo-feminist. Definition: "One who respects her body so much that she won't allow it to be used as someone's playground."


Handsome Man at a Bar, you think I'm cute? Thanks. Do you appreciate me or the idea of having sex with me? Because your thinking has likely been influenced by the cavortings of Samantha and Co. in the "city" or the women in most rap videos. I am not those women. If you want a workout, go get a one-day pass at Bally. It's free.


Members of the "Sex is Natural and Fun and If It Makes You Happy, It Can't Be That Bad" club want sex so badly that they willingly and repeatedly live out the following scenario: Things go "great" for a month or two. Sex quickly becomes a part of your interactions. Maybe he even meets your parents. And then, well, things just change. He dumps you or you dump him.


Regardless of why the relationship died, you are now one of many women whom he could point out on the street. "See her?" he can tell his buddies. "She's cute, huh? Yeah, I had her." I never want to be "her."


The "You Have to Know if You're Sexually Compatible or the Marriage Will Be Doomed" club will argue that one out of two marriages end in divorce, so you have to know that you're sexually compatible before you can even contemplate marriage. Well, maybe one out of two marriages end in divorce precisely because people are too free with sex. Many people don't take time to establish real communication with one another. It's false intimacy.


Many women today are weak-minded in that they readily accept society's portrayal of sexual norms. The people on The O.C. are doing it. Paris Hilton, as she's hosing down that Bentley, appears ready to do it. And more important, many people they actually know are doing it. The sheer prolificness of sex seems to make the decision for them. Women are non-self-respecting because they willingly sacrifice such an important part of their being for just a few moments of pleasure. And they're oblivious because they don't contemplate the profoundness of sex.


Women give it up as if it's nothing. When in fact, it is everything.


Elizabeth Sandoval is a writer who lives in Los Angeles

 

[Couture]

hmmm
found this this morning , and I have to say, I think she'll feel she missed out later. with no experience how do you know if the husbands any good? maybe she'll read alot..
Herw's the article for those like me who hate to have to click

By Elizabeth Sandoval
41 minutes ago
No, I am not an ultraconservative who is cohabitating with a houseful of cats and TiVo'ing Lifetime movies. I'm a middle-of-the-road 32-year-old who likes tattoos and loud music. And yes, I am cute (I've been told by friends and strangers alike). So you can put aside the notion that I'm bitter about not being offered the chance to have sex.


What I am is a neo-feminist. Definition: "One who respects her body so much that she won't allow it to be used as someone's playground."

Women give it up as if it's nothing. When in fact, it is everything.


Elizabeth Sandoval is a writer who lives in Los Angeles

Bitter bitch.... With this type of burnt out narcissistic attitude, no wonder no one want to stay with her.

Sex is natural - sex is fun. Sex is best when it's one on one. Or in the case of George Michael. One-on-one-one-one-one...

But seriously, I don't have any regrets about having sex - except for that one time with an ex. There are regrets I have about not having sex when I could have - back when I was a virgin.

That being said, I've never had a one night stand. Without an emotional connection, I think sex between two people would just be some sort of mutual masturbation that involves penetration.

 

[rgraham666]

All I can say to this woman is, "nice try."

She's an anhedonic who is dreadfully afraid of commitment and the risk of hurt it entails. And she tries desperately to ennoble it.

Most interesting is how she regards sex as an entirely one sided affair. She is "One who respects her body so much that she won't allow it to be used as someone's playground." This means she doesn't get to use someone else's body as a playground.

Sad. I wonder what happened to her that gave her self esteem such a beating?

 

[McKenna]

The "You Have to Know if You're Sexually Compatible or the Marriage Will Be Doomed" club will argue that one out of two marriages end in divorce, so you have to know that you're sexually compatible before you can even contemplate marriage. Well, maybe one out of two marriages end in divorce precisely because people are too free with sex. Many people don't take time to establish real communication with one another. It's false intimacy.

This is one part I agree with. I think too many people don't take the time to establish real communication (and intimacy!) before hopping into bed together. Which is fine if BOTH of your goals is to fuck and have a good time, but if even one of you is looking for something deeper, having sex prematurely does give a sense of false intimacy.

By Sandoval's definition, I'm a neo-feminist: "One who respects her body so much that she won't allow it to be used as someone's playground."

Of course, this seems written from the single-and-dating perspective. If I were in a committed relationship- he could use my body as a playground any day.

 

[dr_mabeuse]

Nothing wrong with her attitude, except that she indulges in the current obsession of confusing a personal opinion with a political statement.

If she doesn't want casual sex, that's her business, but she shouldn't try and inflate her ego by believing she's discovered some new political movement.

 

[Willow Rain]

She comes off sounding bitter and like she doesn't like it very much.
Sex should be joyful sharing, at least in MHO.
At it's best it makes life bloom and glow. I don't know that that chick has experianced that yet, maybe she'll find the gal or guy that will open her into seeing sex as joyful, not a path to morification and emotional pain and humiliation.

Well... unless that ends up being her kink.

kisses and swats,
Willow

 

[Boota]

I was celibate for eleven years for a lot of different reasons. I didn't feel the need to justify my decision to the world. Her piece reads like she isn't entirely comfortable with her lot.

What she needs is a good dicking.

 

[Lucifer_Carroll]

Okay, I'm going to be unpopular for saying this, but good on her.

I'm not saying that everyone should adopt her way and mode of living or that it is more moral to be her way or even that her way is the right way.

Rather, good on her for resisting the belief that if one isn't sexually active, doesn't screw everything with a penis, that they are somehow less of a woman. The reactions here are frighteningly simillar to the "non-player men are bad" bullshit on the man side of the coin. Just because a guy doesn't fuck everything with a pussy, he is considered less of a man.

It all is the same. Isn't sex better as an act of meaningful love, when it's born out of the physical representation of an emotional bond? Isn't that the best sex there is? So what is wrong on peoplle who only want that type of sex? Are they bad people "in need of a dicking"?

I see in the criticism here, the same rot and sexism of our society (which does make her article a part of feminism), which strives to force women into the male fantasy whores that offer themselves to each asshole and never form an emotional connection from it. She doesn't want to sleep around, fine. Why must we criticize her for that? Why is she a "bad woman" or "bitter"?

I'm not saying she is the pinnacle or that women who do sleep around or who strive to comprehend sex before settling down are bad and naughty and all the sexist bullshit men use to keep women's self-esteem down. And I think most fail to fit the model she presents (the stereotypical woman who has molded herself into a mere male plaything and no longer has any resepct for herself and who generally receives little pleasure from the sexual encounters herself).

Overall, I guess my main point is that all the "hah hah, look at the "virgin archetype" and how she fails to conform, let's all hate her and tell her to get dicked" is the same sexist bullshit that gets hurled at the "slut archetype" which infers that since they want to enjoy sex and understand their body, they must be willing and have given it to everyone including Joe the kumquat salesman. We must fight this sexism not be co-opted by it. If we do that, the Horde has already won.

 

[Willow Rain]

Okay, I'm going to be unpopular for saying this, but good on her.

I'm not saying that everyone should adopt her way and mode of living or that it is more moral to be her way or even that her way is the right way.

Rather, good on her for resisting the belief that if one isn't sexually active, doesn't screw everything with a penis, that they are somehow less of a woman. The reactions here are frighteningly simillar to the "non-player men are bad" bullshit on the man side of the coin. Just because a guy doesn't fuck everything with a pussy, he is considered less of a man.

It all is the same. Isn't sex better as an act of meaningful love, when it's born out of the physical representation of an emotional bond? Isn't that the best sex there is? So what is wrong on peoplle who only want that type of sex? Are they bad people "in need of a dicking"?

I see in the criticism here, the same rot and sexism of our society (which does make her article a part of feminism), which strives to force women into the male fantasy whores that offer themselves to each asshole and never form an emotional connection from it. She doesn't want to sleep around, fine. Why must we criticize her for that? Why is she a "bad woman" or "bitter"?

I'm not saying she is the pinnacle or that women who do sleep around or who strive to comprehend sex before settling down are bad and naughty and all the sexist bullshit men use to keep women's self-esteem down. And I think most fail to fit the model she presents (the stereotypical woman who has molded herself into a mere male plaything and no longer has any resepct for herself and who generally receives little pleasure from the sexual encounters herself).

Overall, I guess my main point is that all the "hah hah, look at the "virgin archetype" and how she fails to conform, let's all hate her and tell her to get dicked" is the same sexist bullshit that gets hurled at the "slut archetype" which infers that since they want to enjoy sex and understand their body, they must be willing and have given it to everyone including Joe the kumquat salesman. We must fight this sexism not be co-opted by it. If we do that, the Horde has already won.

"Isn't sex better as an act of meaningful love, when it's born out of the physical representation of an emotional bond? Isn't that the best sex there is? "

Well, actually, maybe for you, but maybe not for everyone. I don't think that is an inherant absolute. What about sex as an act of faith or worship? Or sex as somthing raw and fleeting and human? Or as a life fullfilling community act? The range of what a human being can want and what can be fullfilling to them is really wide. I think it is impossible to say what the "best" kind of sex is, unless you are talking specifically about yourself. Then heck yeah, speak on.

I don't think choosing not to be sexually active is bad. If that is someones bliss I am all for supporting it. Her tone about sex and about men was bitter, at least to me. She wasn't saying, this is what is wholesome and right for me. She was saying if I do something else they will treat me like a dog and I will feel like ass. I would have been far more comfortable if she had attributed her life choices using positive terms. That would have put a whole other spin on what she said. I certainly don't think that the only path to joy involves having fucking in your life. THere are many celibate people who live lives of joy, and who make that choice out of postitive intent, not bitterness, anger, or fear. Also I think it is completely possible to wait until marriage, make a good choice and enjoy a lifetime of bedroom bliss. The paths to both joy and misery are limetless.

It is just as anti feminist to insult or degrade women who choose to live or utalize their sexuality in an active or promiscuous manner. Labeling them a whore or slut is just as sexist as what you are railing against. Why can't a woman have sex just because it feels awsome? Women should be allowed the full range of choices, not just be limited to a few. Arn't you belittling promiscuous women by saying they are only living out a male fantasy, I mean arn't they inherantly living out their own fantasy? If I have the urge to grovel at someones feet, lick their ass, and fuck them silly, hell if I have the urge to do that ten times a day to ten differant people... If it makes me happy and brings me bliss than I have that right, and you should support me in following my bliss and breaking out of what is "acceptable" for women.

To me... her tone did not display any joy about sex, or men. I'm assuming from what she said that she was strait. But if you read it and felt otherwise, you have every right to that opinion. I did not say she was bitter in an attempt to degrade someone who chooses to limit who they sleep with. I'm all for each person finding their bliss whatever it is. If my comments about what she wrote and how she wrote it personally offended you, my apologies.

Willow

 

[Willow Rain]

Overall, I guess my main point is that all the "hah hah, look at the "virgin archetype" and how she fails to conform, let's all hate her and tell her to get dicked" is the same sexist bullshit that gets hurled at the "slut archetype" which infers that since they want to enjoy sex and understand their body, they must be willing and have given it to everyone including Joe the kumquat salesman. We must fight this sexism not be co-opted by it. If we do that, the Horde has already won.

One more thing, part of what made me take her tone as bitter was her "Sex is something men do to us." attitude and language. I don't buy that. I own my own sexuality. I claim my lust, my desire and all the things I choose to do with it. Sex is something, on whatever level, shared with another person/persons. It's a team sport. I am not the playing field, I am not the dead and powerless ball, I wear a jersey, I got on cleats, I'm on the team, I'm in the damn game.

Wishing you only well,
Willow

 

[Lucifer_Carroll]

Well, actually, maybe for you, but maybe not for everyone. I don't think that is an inherant absolute. What about sex as an act of faith or worship? Or sex as somthing raw and fleeting and human? Or as a life fullfilling community act? The range of what a human being can want and what can be fullfilling to them is really wide. I think it is impossible to say what the "best" kind of sex is, unless you are talking specifically about yourself. Then heck yeah, speak on.

I don't think choosing not to be sexually active is bad. If that is someones bliss I am all for supporting it. Her tone about sex and about men was bitter, at least to me. She wasn't saying, this is what is wholesome and right for me. She was saying if I do something else they will treat me like a dog and I will feel like ass. I would have been far more comfortable if she had attributed her life choices using positive terms. That would have put a whole other spin on what she said. I certainly don't think that the only path to joy involves having fucking in your life. THere are many celibate people who live lives of joy, and who make that choice out of postitive intent, not bitterness, anger, or fear. Also I think it is completely possible to wait until marriage, make a good choice and enjoy a lifetime of bedroom bliss. The paths to both joy and misery are limetless.

It is just as anti feminist to insult or degrade women who choose to live or utalize their sexuality in an active or promiscuous manner. Labeling them a whore or slut is just as sexist as what you are railing against. Why can't a woman have sex just because it feels awsome? Women should be allowed the full range of choices, not just be limited to a few. Arn't you belittling promiscuous women by saying they are only living out a male fantasy, I mean arn't they inherantly living out their own fantasy? If I have the urge to grovel at someones feet, lick their ass, and fuck them silly, hell if I have the urge to do that ten times a day to ten differant people... If it makes me happy and brings me bliss than I have that right, and you should support me in following my bliss and breaking out of what is "acceptable" for women.

To me... her tone did not display any joy about sex, or men. I'm assuming from what she said that she was strait. But if you read it and felt otherwise, you have every right to that opinion. I did not say she was bitter in an attempt to degrade someone who chooses to limit who they sleep with. I'm all for each person finding their bliss whatever it is. If my comments about what she wrote and how she wrote it personally offended you, my apologies.

Willow

Um, read me. I say that the other side of the coin has its own sexist bullshit and I also state that it is wrong for them to be treated as such. I believe the sexual double-standard between men and women is a crying shame as is the division of all women into "slut" and "virgin" archetypes and berating them accordingly to those archetypes.

I also state that a promiscuous woman is not inherently the same as one (as the article states) who has become a mere plaything of male fantasy. What both of us likely mean is the type of woman who has ceased to have self-respect for herself and who by a sexist society gives herself over to be molded by men at the detriment to her sexual enjoyment and to her growth as a person. THIS IS DIFFERENT from women who are promiscuous because they enjoy sex and are exploring their sexuality and who derive pleasure and self-satisfaction from the act and are not demeaned. The two people are different and while she could have done well to clarify that difference, the fact that she didn't didn't shoudn't dismiss her whole point.

I stated all of this.

And as far as making a choice out of bitterness, why not? Look at example case Joe Fratboy: beer-bellied, no clue what a clitoris is, date rapes 14 year olds, has a four-inch dick. You refuse to fuck him because he's an asshole. Is your choice out of bitterness? Should you be "dicked" because you refused to sleep with him? Are you less of a woman?

She is railing against a society that tells her that she is all of that because she didn't want to. Is she bitter about men? Probably, but there's a lot to be bitter about. We men are the shit off the World's shoe. But she is most bitter about a system that values her less because she is not turned on by the prospect of screwing everything walking around. Is the one who does screw a lot less of a person? NO! Is the person who doesn't screw a lot less of a person? NO!

That's the point regardless of how the tone is on everything. A decision can be made by realizing what WON'T make you happy just as it can be made by realizing what WILL.

And don't worry, you didn't offend me. I just feel that there needs to be a collective resistance of all the sexism if we are ever going to be successful against any piece of it.

 

[Lucifer_Carroll]

One more thing, part of what made me take her tone as bitter was her "Sex is something men do to us." attitude and language. I don't buy that. I own my own sexuality. I claim my lust, my desire and all the things I choose to do with it. Sex is something, on whatever level, shared with another person/persons. It's a team sport. I am not the playing field, I am not the dead and powerless ball, I wear a jersey, I got on cleats, I'm on the team, I'm in the damn game.

Wishing you only well,
Willow

Good on you as well.

It's not either or.

 

[Liar]

I see in the criticism here, the same rot and sexism of our society (which does make her article a part of feminism), which strives to force women into the male fantasy whores that offer themselves to each asshole and never form an emotional connection from it. She doesn't want to sleep around, fine. Why must we criticize her for that? Why is she a "bad woman" or "bitter"?

Naah. She don't want to spread the goods around. Who am I to question that?

My only beef with her is that she, like DrM pointed out, is putting a politicking spin on her own personal lifestyle choice, condesending those many who have made an informed choice to live their lives differently. The "bad woman" and "bitter" replies are just backlash against her own just as unforgiving rhetoric strategy. And she takes the argumentation to tiresome and fallacious cliches.

It's not that she is resisting the belief that if one isn't sexually active they are somehow less of a woman. It's that she's, like debaters to, on every issue, polarizes it to the exact opposite. Picturing sexually active women as pwned (to reconnect with my geek roots), duped, degraded bimbos. The lot of them, no exceptions. It's not that she doesn't have a point, it's that she delivers it like a doofus.

And it's either communication and emotional bonds or sex in her world. Pardon me for not seeing the dichotomy.

 

[Lucifer_Carroll]

Naah. She don't want to spread the goods around. Who am I to question that?

My only beef with her is that she, like DrM pointed out, is putting a politicking spin on her own personal lifestyle choice, condesending those many who have made an informed choice to live their lives differently. The "bad woman" and "bitter" replies are just backlash against her own just as unforgiving rhetoric strategy. And she takes the argumentation to tiresome and fallacious cliches.

It's still wrong.

It's not that she is resisting the belief that if one isn't sexually active they are somehow less of a woman. It's that she's, like debaters to, on every issue, polarizes it to the exact opposite. Picturing sexually active women as pwned (to reconnect with my geek roots), duped, degraded bimbos. The lot of them, no exceptions. It's not that she doesn't have a point, it's that she delivers it like a doofus.

Point. I think we have a difference of opinion on whether she is referring to non-degraded and degraded women in the same ultra group or whether she is (in my opinion) overstating the degraded women group (women who are promiscuous but not because of their honest desires, but because they have been "pwned"). You're absolutely right that she could have said it a hell of a lot better. Still doesn't mean she should be looked down upon. Especially when her outlook is unpopular in the sexist world (as seen by the comments mostly referring to her need to get laid rather than to her failure to communicate effectively)<How Ironic>.

And it's either communication and emotional bonds or sex in her world. Pardon me for not seeing the dichotomy.

Sorry, all pardons are issued by the Dichotomy Visualization Board. I don't have authority over that.

 

[woodnymph_O]

One more thing, part of what made me take her tone as bitter was her "Sex is something men do to us." attitude and language. I don't buy that. I own my own sexuality. I claim my lust, my desire and all the things I choose to do with it. Sex is something, on whatever level, shared with another person/persons. It's a team sport. I am not the playing field, I am not the dead and powerless ball, I wear a jersey, I got on cleats, I'm on the team, I'm in the damn game.

Wishing you only well,
Willow

you saw that too ?
Nymphy

 

[Quiet_Cool]

HOnestly, I don't see that she's doing something all that terrible. More like she's thinking out loud and will later come back and read it over and say, "Wow! Was I that self-righteous?" I get the impression that she's just been through too many "live life our way" lectures. We all have those times when we've heard so much of the "do this and do that cuz it's my way and everyone should be like me" bullshit. She seems to have burned out on it some.

And if she's not as experienced as she'd like to be later in life, I guess her choices led to it, and she'll have to live with her choices. I live with mine, I think all of you live with yours.

As for the sexist topic, what isn't sexist? And you have to remember that generalizing about men is every bit as sexist as generalizing about women. And you also have to consider how many women use the stereotypes that Luc mentioned for the sake of gaining and keeping attention, among other things. It's not just men who are pushing these stereotypes. And it's also not just women who are being pressured by them within society. Men are being objectionalized just as much as women are nowadays. You can't hold the simple fact that we do a worse job of staying off the Jelly Donuts against us for how it affects your average man.

Q_C

 

[elsol]

*burp*

Neo-Feminist? Sounds like neo-con wrapped in feminist rhetoric?

I'll celebrate any woman who fucks; I'll celebrate the ones who don't too... just not in the bedroom

Sincerely,
ElSol

 

[strawberryangel]

hmmm
found this this morning , and I have to say, I think she'll feel she missed out later. with no experience how do you know if the husbands any good? maybe she'll read alot..
Herw's the article for those like me who hate to have to click

By Elizabeth Sandoval
41 minutes ago
No, I am not an ultraconservative who is cohabitating with a houseful of cats and TiVo'ing Lifetime movies. I'm a middle-of-the-road 32-year-old who likes tattoos and loud music. And yes, I am cute (I've been told by friends and strangers alike). So you can put aside the notion that I'm bitter about not being offered the chance to have sex.


What I am is a neo-feminist. Definition: "One who respects her body so much that she won't allow it to be used as someone's playground."


Handsome Man at a Bar, you think I'm cute? Thanks. Do you appreciate me or the idea of having sex with me? Because your thinking has likely been influenced by the cavortings of Samantha and Co. in the "city" or the women in most rap videos. I am not those women. If you want a workout, go get a one-day pass at Bally. It's free.


Members of the "Sex is Natural and Fun and If It Makes You Happy, It Can't Be That Bad" club want sex so badly that they willingly and repeatedly live out the following scenario: Things go "great" for a month or two. Sex quickly becomes a part of your interactions. Maybe he even meets your parents. And then, well, things just change. He dumps you or you dump him.


Regardless of why the relationship died, you are now one of many women whom he could point out on the street. "See her?" he can tell his buddies. "She's cute, huh? Yeah, I had her." I never want to be "her."


The "You Have to Know if You're Sexually Compatible or the Marriage Will Be Doomed" club will argue that one out of two marriages end in divorce, so you have to know that you're sexually compatible before you can even contemplate marriage. Well, maybe one out of two marriages end in divorce precisely because people are too free with sex. Many people don't take time to establish real communication with one another. It's false intimacy.


Many women today are weak-minded in that they readily accept society's portrayal of sexual norms. The people on The O.C. are doing it. Paris Hilton, as she's hosing down that Bentley, appears ready to do it. And more important, many people they actually know are doing it. The sheer prolificness of sex seems to make the decision for them. Women are non-self-respecting because they willingly sacrifice such an important part of their being for just a few moments of pleasure. And they're oblivious because they don't contemplate the profoundness of sex.


Women give it up as if it's nothing. When in fact, it is everything.


Elizabeth Sandoval is a writer who lives in Los Angeles

A woman secure in herself and her sexuality isn’t being used. Wanting sex isn’t being used.

Relationships die because too many people RUSH into marriage or grow apart even though they have good communication or work at it. You can even have the best communication with the worst sex…..one day you look at the other person and are able to tell them they don’t ‘do’ it for you. And it is because of the great communication you can tell them it is over. In the end sex and communication go hand in hand and if one fails and can’t be fixed the relationship is doomed. If you have limited experience in sex you could be complacent in thinking the sex is good and he may think it is bad and then you are the weak link. Saving yourself is a personal choice and should not be taken as a stance to belittle those who do not share it.

And while I am all into a man working out at Bally’s nothing is better than a sweaty bedroom workout.

 

[woodnymph_O]

wishing i could email the author

i wonder if she ever thought confidence in one's self could go another direction,, such as,
why couldn't a confident woman walk down the street speaking to friends, and look over at a sexy man "you see that hunk over there? I had him." I guess we all just have different ideas on pride and confidence. I for one am proud to proclaim "MY BODY IS A PLAYGROUND" If it wasn't why would it be filled with so many fun things to do.
Nymphy

 

[dr_mabeuse]

My real objection to this is the same one I have to most of the arguments in the gender wars: she generalizes, and generalizes unfairly. All sexually active women are sluts and dupes, and all men are exploitive, unfeeling bastards.

Her little piece has all the feel of some bad personal experiences generalized into a political attitude. We wouldn't stand for this kind of stuff if she were talking about Blacks or Catholics, but when it comes to men and women, we don't seem to mind a bit.

 

[woodnymph_O]

My real objection to this is the same one I have to most of the arguments in the gender wars: she generalizes, and generalizes unfairly. All sexually active women are sluts and dupes, and all men are exploitive, unfeeling bastards.

Her little piece has all the feel of some bad personal experiences generalized into a political attitude. We wouldn't stand for this kind of stuff if she were talking about Blacks or Catholics, but when it comes to men and women, we don't seem to mind a bit.

For the record
I mind and find it all a little close minded on her part
and from what i see in this thread im not the only one

 

[Liar]

You're absolutely right that she could have said it a hell of a lot better. Still doesn't mean she should be looked down upon.

As a participator in public debate, I do look down upon her. As a person, no.

Especially when her outlook is unpopular in the sexist world (as seen by the comments mostly referring to her need to get laid rather than to her failure to communicate effectively)<How Ironic>.

That is their faliure to communicate.

 

[Quiet_Cool]

My real objection to this is the same one I have to most of the arguments in the gender wars: she generalizes, and generalizes unfairly. All sexually active women are sluts and dupes, and all men are exploitive, unfeeling bastards.

Her little piece has all the feel of some bad personal experiences generalized into a political attitude. We wouldn't stand for this kind of stuff if she were talking about Blacks or Catholics, but when it comes to men and women, we don't seem to mind a bit.

Well-said, Doc. The problem lies in the simple fact that everyone, in one form or another, generalizes.

For the record
I mind and find it all a little close minded on her part
and from what i see in this thread im not the only one

Like generalizing, everyone's close-minded, just on different issues. If she's been pressured to see things differently, not just had it suggested but been pressured as her lifestyle in many circles in current American culture (can't say I know where she's from), then she's bound to be more close-minded on this topic than on others.

Ignorance (as in both generalizing, and close-midedness, though they do go hand-in-hand, don't they?) is part of the human machine. We can fight to minimize it within ourselves, but we only live so long, and it's in great abundance. There's simply too much to learn, and too many people who don't bother.

*shrug*

Fuck it.

If I met this girl, I'd buy her a few drinks and promise (and honestly so) not to take advantage. I tend to be that way.

Q_C

 

[Liar]

Fuck it.

If I met this girl, I'd buy her a few drinks and promise (and honestly so) not to take advantage. I tend to be that way.

I did just that. Solo and bored on a business trip, I asked a cute girl who stayed at the same hotel as me to join me for dinner, drinks and dancing. I introduced the "no trying to jump you, not now, not ever" clause, and we had a great time together.

She's still one of my best friends, and to this day, I haven't. However, she introduced me to her cousin, who decided that I should fall for her, and then made sure I did. Wimmin. What can ya do?

 

[Quiet_Cool]

Wimmin. What can ya do?

I'm hoping you don't need me to draw pictures...



Q_C